I think you're thinking that a bee precautionary label would say something like "Warning: Dangerous to Bees," in which case non-beekeeping farmers might not care. I suspect the label would instead mandate that users apply the product in a prescribed manner in order to minimize drift (one of the known causes of toxicity to bees). Pesticides typically come with fairly detailed instructions for proper use. My point, though, was that mandating such a label, in this case, is still not an adequate response on the part of EFED to the problem.
I think you're close enough here to the presupposition of both my comments above as makes no difference.
That's why I said the EFED recommendations were too weak; that's why I called it an 'inadequate response.' Let me say it again explicitly: A warning is not good enough. Let me clarify again the original point: The real scandal here is that EFED thinks a warning is good enough.
